Nice review, has anyone tried the new 3? I wanted to stick with true to size but after wrestling with them for a week I sized up a 1/2 size. I felt like the heel cup collar foam was so cushioned it was pushing me to forward in the fit. It was a battle between heel lock and lacing being too tight…
Runrepeat has classified the V2 as a summer shoe and V3 as a winter shoe. They said the midsole of the V3 performs much better in colder temperatures and the upper is a bit warmer. Strange because its technically the same foam on paper anyway.
That is interesting. I agree, you'd think that the midsoles would act the same. I would have thought it was the new upper that made it a little more winter friendly
Always value these reviews regardless of whether I’m interested in the shoe. Actual trail runners reviewing shoes with solid mileage. It’s shocking to say that’s a rarity. Keep it up guys 👏
Thought it was crap after the first two runs, knee pains, went back into the closet. Couldn't believe you guys loved it so much, so I tried it again. Outsole: best ever. Midsole: superb, way better than the Nimbus. Way way better than the Speedgoat 5. Trail way better than the novablast 3 TR. Stable but plush. Upper: looks and feels 1997.. But damn is it comfortable. Can't fault it. Thx guys, cant believe this isnt the leading trail running vlog.
Do you think it just needed a few runs to break in? I've also loved to blame other issues I've been having on shoes, so perhaps it was just a bad time to try out a new shoe? Glad you have it a 2nd chance though and that it's worked out for you! Appreciate the feedback and thanks for watching!
@@ConversationalPace this def was a “it is me, not you“ issue. When I am injured I pick this shoe. It might not feel fast, but I easily break pr-s in it. I want this with a road upper and road outsole. Been running a lot with the Agravic ultra, that feels fast but in reality this shoe isn’t much slower but , big but, the amount of damage on the muscles is so much higher. This is a Tina Turner, simply the best. Better than all the rest
Great review! I have almost 100 miles on my TM2’s now and absolutely love them. Raced my 30k in them too. I would love to see a review comparing them to the new New Balance Fresh Foam X Trail More v3.
You guys killed it on this review. Just picked this shoe up and the New Balance More Trail V3. The MTV3 is definitely the softer, squishier shoe but to a fault imo, as it suffers from lack of responsiveness and energy return in any type of incline situation. The Trabuco on the other hand somehow has both amazing cushion and responsiveness. This shoe checks so many boxes.
That NB is quite the shoe! I agree it might be too soft and I worry about how much it might pack out over the course of an ultra. That Trabuco though somehow doesn't feel that way despite being nearly as soft! Truly a very well balanced shoe
Great review, thank you! I'm expecting mine tomorrow 4/12/23 and am super excited to try them out. Will hit you back with more info in the coming weeks. Thanks again!
Agreed on all counts...the TM2 is a great one. It's comfortable, protective, grippy, and remarkably stable for its stack. Not sure I'd race in it on courses with water crossings but otherwise....so, so good. Great review and convo!
I forded rivers in the Swedish Arctic last week while out running 15miles/24km, super cold water, felt no problem with the shoes getting drenched at all, dried and felt comfortable really quick IMHO. Love the shoes, my only regret is that I couldn't get my second pair in black, so I have 2 pairs of blue.
Love this shoe. Its also basically the nimbus 25 with a trail outsole. Best outsole compound on the market. Grips on wet surfaces better than anything else.
Thanks for your reviews. All great so far (except that the Naked T/r does work incredibly well for some of us ;-) I would have considered this for the Cowboy 200, which I raced last November using the Hoka Tecton X (for the first 125 miles) until - after my feet had swollen a full size - I switched to the NNormal Tomir, which has a voluminous fit. Not sure if one shoe can work for 200 Miles if one’s feet swell so significantly. I might consider the ASICS for the Sangre de Cristo 200 in Colorado this September.
Thanks for watching! I agree, I'm not so sure there is really one shoe that could truly be great for the entirety of a 200 mile race, but this one could be close! It definitely would come down to foot swelling and if there is a need to go up a size mid-way through.
@@ConversationalPace the Naked T/r would be my first choice for Beyond 100 distances in the mountains if the upper were modified to allow boas or laces or some other kind of adjustability when swelling occurs. I would cache a second pair in a bigger size to deal with my enlarged feet. The midsole feel of the T/r is, as you pointed out in your video, the very best on the market today, including for those of us who don’t trust overbuilt shoes on technical climbs and especially descents. Cheers! And thanks again.
Oh definitely! Comfort is key for something like that. Just make sure you are comfortable with only having the stability of a trail running shoe as opposed to a true hiking shoe
@@ConversationalPace Sounds good. I will try to walk around with my backpack in my apartment to make sure of that :). Or would you maybe for the sake of stability recommend the Gel Trabuco 12 over this one?
Tried it out at Art Sports in Yokohama (close to where I live). Really wanted to buy it but they only sold JP 28.0 and I need 28.5 (about US 10.5). Will probably still end up picking a pair up for a 100km race in May.
Interesting that you assume the “in-house” rubber is cheaper than say a Continental or Vibram and that is why the price is lower. Maybe their labor cost are lower over overseas?
@@ConversationalPace great videos, but your statement still does not address the issue. Asics rubber could indeed be more expensive. Unless you have seen the material costs (and use fee), how do you know why the shoe is priced the way it is? It is only an assumption. No one has cost data to show that Vibram or Continental is in fact more expensive. And if it actually is, what is the actual material cost? $2 each shoe for a piece of molded rubber? The tooling costs are the same, the labor to install the rubber is essentially the same. You are only looking at the cost for the actual rubber compound.
@@edlorenz1552 There's a little more to it than just the price of the rubber compound. There's the price to get the vibram rubber to the asics factory for install as well. When a company like Asics is producing and selling many millions of pairs of shoes a year, they definitely have the means to mass produce their own outsole at a cheaper price than outsourcing Vibram. at the scale of a large company like Asics, it's cheaper to do it in house. For a smaller company like nnormal, for the amount they produce, it's going to be cheaper to go through a company like Vibram instead of purchasing all the machinery necessary to do it themselves. I've talked with a few large brands as well as Vibram, and I wish I was able to more publicly say specific pricing numbers, but those conversations were off the record. They don't make those pricing figures public
@@ConversationalPace I suggest just keep reviewing shoes, but don’t make blank statements about pricing that you don’t understand. You might know about shoes, but you definitely don’t know about manufacturing. Let’s just agree to disagree.
i would say it's alright. With how high the stack is of this shoe, it is going to be less nimble and stable than many trail shoes that are lower to the ground. As far as max cushioned trail shoes go, I thought that this was one of the better ones on more technical terrain with the Hoka Mafate Speed 4 still being my favorite. Hope this helps!
Asics does a lot of TR versions of their top road shoes..... I think all of them.....most have 8mm offsets and low key knobs. The Novablast 3TR I founc to be more stable and way better fitting than Max 2. I am now checking out Cumulus 25 TR.. ----- broad midsole, roomy toe box, snug heel and midfoot, flexible forefoot and enough knobby for damp to dry trails....... and FF BLAST + for trail runners who like cushiion.. The max 2 midsole flairing (lack of) prevents higher paced off chamber running. Max 2 is a predictable surface trail shoe.
Yeah the width of the Max 2 doesn't lend it to be the most nimble of shoes for sure. I would be super curious to try out the Cumulus TR, as that has always been such a reliable shoe for me and I run on pretty mild trails so road cushioning with just a bit of tread is the sweet spot for most of my miles
Thanks for watching! The hats are a coaching company called Trails & Tarmac. Here's a link to their shop trails-and-tarmac.myshopify.com/collections/trails-and-tarmac-gear
To me, the caldera was a touch firmer and a little lower to the ground, but even though the Asics was thicker, I still found it easier to cover all the paces in the Asics. I also thought the upper was more comfortable in the Asics. If I had to choose between the two for really anything actually, I'm going with the Asics
generally speaking, it would be fantastic. If you know where in the world you would be spending the majority of your time hiking, there might be others that will be more specific to the terrain, but this Trabuco Max would be great across a wide variety for sure.
I think it would depend on the severity of overpronation. This shoe does provide some stability, but it is still pretty soft, and there are shoes out there that could be even better for overpronation. Many trail shoes don't have any of the traditional features of road shoes that correct overpronation, because the trail underfoot is so different with each step and negates a lot of how those systems in a road shoe would work. So while this shoe would be alright, a few high stack shoes that might be better would be the Hoka Mafate and the Topo Ultraventure
I have a question. I really like this sneaker design, but the question is, would it be a good choice for hiking in the mountains for distances of 15 to 30 kilometers? If not, what would be the best choice in terms of comfort?
I think the answer for what shoe or shoes might work best would depend on the type of mountain trails you are hiking on. These are definitely some of the most comfortable shoes I have worn. I wouldn't take them on very technical terrain though, as the amount of cushion these shoes have does sacrifice some of the stability.
Unfortunately, I haven't run in the first generation of the Trabuco Max, so I'm not sure how the stability compares. For what it's worth, I did feel that for a shoe with this much stack height, it did feel pretty stable.
I haven't tried the Glideride 3 personally, but it should feel pretty similar in terms of cushioning. The rocker of the Glideride 3 appears to start a little earlier under the foot, which will make the heel to toe transition (on flat ground) smoother. The Trabuco Max 2 rocker is a little shorter and starts later to get a bit more of the shoe touching the ground at any given point so there is more stability, which is beneficial for the trail. Hope this helps!
The New Balance are definitely softer. I would have to imagine that in the long term, the Asics is going to deliver a higher quality cushion experience for more miles, because it starts out just a touch firmer.
I do have a question regarding this shoe, I'm a fairly heavy set guy around 15 Kilos overweight, although I have done a fair deal of weightlifting in the past so that ideal weight calculation might be off a few kilos. I've started taking up running as I need to get in shape but always had issues with knees and shins even before I got overweight. My physical therapist has guided me to Asics Gel shoes something I've had mentioned before but never really took note of. I've invested in Trabuco 11 GTX as well as some inlay soles to help stabilize my arches and have better form. So would the max 2 that is even more cushioned be a better shoe for me to alleviate fatigue and help me gain longer distance? I run a mixture of dirt. gravel and tarmac. Sorry for the long rant hope you guys can give me some insight.
This is definitely a very debated topic and while I'm not a medical professional and this is not direct advice, this is what I've found to be helpful for me and runners I've worked with. A higher cushioned shoe will only help protect your knees/shins/joints etc if you are working on running with efficient biomechanics. If you have bad running form habits, then a higher cushioned shoe will likely only serve as a crutch that you will continue to lean into more, and you can only pack so much cushion in a shoe. If you are actively working on making your running form more efficient, which helps a lot with proper loading and unloading of the joints, then a higher cushioned shoe will also help you out. With all that being said, the Trabuco Max 2 has quite a bit more stack height (and softer foam) than the Trabuco 11. Thanks for watching!
Would love your opinion: I've got a first ever 50k coming up in April. Had a tough time finding shoes that fit my foot but The Trabuco Max 2 and Challenger 7 both fit. Which would you use on a SW (Sedona) 50k where you're not worried about finish time?
honestly, it's really a toss up if both are comfortable and fit well. I'd lean towards the challenger if there were more dirt (or even paved) road sections, and Asics if it has more singletrack. Asics might handle mud and slop a little better, but it's a pretty close match up. My gut is to always go with the one I am most comfortable in. Best of luck!
We haven't gotten to put the Catamount 2 on yet, unfortunately, but the Mtn Racer 2 is similar in regards to forefoot volume and space. The Topo toe box is a little more squared off, but the underfoot width of the Asics is actually a bit wider. Heel width is similar as well, but the biggest difference in overall fit is the way the arch shape feel. More arch shape in the Topo with some love or hate. The Asics took a little less risk there by keeping that overall arch height a little bit lower. Hope this helps!
@@ConversationalPace It does! People seem to love both the Catamount 2 and the MTN Racer 2 (ETA July for the 3?) so I'd like to compare them for trails. Need some cushion for my achey feet.
Yes very similar sizing to those from a length standpoint. The toe box of the Trabuco Max 2 is a little bit rounder, so the toes will have more room to splay out, but that shouldn't be enough to affect the size you get. Hope this helps!
No trail runners use Asics? what is Xavier Thevenard then? Also Should have bought these when I asked Brett About these awhile back Stoked to try these
@@ConversationalPace I read a poll that accounted shoes worn at UTMB all week and asics was top 5. (this was a few years ago) Hoka wasnt in the top 5, so it was an old report. But stoked to check these out
5 years is a long time in the trail world. Perhaps more popular outside of the US, but I would love to see Asics make more of a push into the US trail market
That's right! I hope that means there will be continued investment into the trail world by Asics. I don't see Sara running in this Trabuco Max 2 much, but hopefully there will be some fun lighter weight, more agile shoes down the line!
The superblast has FF Turbo foam whereas this Trabuco has FF Blast +, so the Trabuco is going to have a little less responsiveness than the Superblast. Combared to the rest of the Asics trail line up, this Trabuco definitely has the most in common with the Superblast
Yes, this could be a great shoe! It has plenty of cushion to protect the body, but also a wide base to help with stability. With these higher cushioned shoes that are very soft, it is important to replace them at the appropriate time when the cushion starts to break down. For higher stack shoes such as this one, there is more cushion to break down, which also increases the chance for it to break down unevenly, which can throw the ankles, knees, and hips out of alignment. Hope this helps!
Good point on Olympic trials but any other trail/cross country race the world athletics would not care. They are only concerned with road/pavement races.
That's a tough one! The Stinson is going to provide even more cushioning and has a wider platform for stability. The Trabuco Max is going to feel a little bouncier, little lighter, and provide a bit better grip.
@@ConversationalPace Pulled the trigger today (5 months later after my comment here) at bought it at USD75 😂. Looked at the upcoming version 3, just an upper update with the exact same midsole and outsole.
@ConversationalPace I like this shoe but I've been more into distance road running, down here we don't have snow on roads etc. I could easily buy the meta edge or sky. Have enough shoes right now though.
Nice review, has anyone tried the new 3? I wanted to stick with true to size but after wrestling with them for a week I sized up a 1/2 size. I felt like the heel cup collar foam was so cushioned it was pushing me to forward in the fit. It was a battle between heel lock and lacing being too tight…
I haven't tried the 3 yet. Surely someone here will be an early adopter though and can chime in! Gonna pin this comment
Runrepeat has classified the V2 as a summer shoe and V3 as a winter shoe. They said the midsole of the V3 performs much better in colder temperatures and the upper is a bit warmer. Strange because its technically the same foam on paper anyway.
That is interesting. I agree, you'd think that the midsoles would act the same. I would have thought it was the new upper that made it a little more winter friendly
Yes half size up in max 3
Always value these reviews regardless of whether I’m interested in the shoe. Actual trail runners reviewing shoes with solid mileage. It’s shocking to say that’s a rarity. Keep it up guys 👏
Hey we appreciate it! Just trying to add the most value to these shoe reviews in the ways we know how!
Thought it was crap after the first two runs, knee pains, went back into the closet.
Couldn't believe you guys loved it so much, so I tried it again.
Outsole: best ever.
Midsole: superb, way better than the Nimbus. Way way better than the Speedgoat 5. Trail way better than the novablast 3 TR. Stable but plush.
Upper: looks and feels 1997.. But damn is it comfortable. Can't fault it.
Thx guys, cant believe this isnt the leading trail running vlog.
Do you think it just needed a few runs to break in? I've also loved to blame other issues I've been having on shoes, so perhaps it was just a bad time to try out a new shoe? Glad you have it a 2nd chance though and that it's worked out for you! Appreciate the feedback and thanks for watching!
@@ConversationalPace this def was a “it is me, not you“ issue. When I am injured I pick this shoe.
It might not feel fast, but I easily break pr-s in it. I want this with a road upper and road outsole.
Been running a lot with the Agravic ultra, that feels fast but in reality this shoe isn’t much slower but , big but, the amount of damage on the muscles is so much higher.
This is a Tina Turner, simply the best. Better than all the rest
Good review! 🤘
These are the types of reviews that really make online shopping easier. Thank you lads
Love to hear it!
Great review! I have almost 100 miles on my TM2’s now and absolutely love them. Raced my 30k in them too. I would love to see a review comparing them to the new New Balance Fresh Foam X Trail More v3.
We definitely will review the More v3 if we have the opportunity to. There's a whole wave of megamax cushioned shoes and we're here for it 🔥🔥
thanks for the information about the shoe and how it responds to different surfaces and paces
Thanks for watching! We're glad it was useful!
You guys killed it on this review. Just picked this shoe up and the New Balance More Trail V3. The MTV3 is definitely the softer, squishier shoe but to a fault imo, as it suffers from lack of responsiveness and energy return in any type of incline situation. The Trabuco on the other hand somehow has both amazing cushion and responsiveness. This shoe checks so many boxes.
That NB is quite the shoe! I agree it might be too soft and I worry about how much it might pack out over the course of an ultra. That Trabuco though somehow doesn't feel that way despite being nearly as soft! Truly a very well balanced shoe
Well said! I agree...this Asics is one of the best shoes I've ever run in.
Great review, thank you! I'm expecting mine tomorrow 4/12/23 and am super excited to try them out. Will hit you back with more info in the coming weeks. Thanks again!
Thanks for watching! This one is going in my top 5 trail shoes for the year, I can already tell. Enjoy!
How did you get on with them?
Agreed on all counts...the TM2 is a great one. It's comfortable, protective, grippy, and remarkably stable for its stack. Not sure I'd race in it on courses with water crossings but otherwise....so, so good. Great review and convo!
Thanks for watching! I didn't get to test the drainage capabilities. Not very good? Able to compare to a shoe that drains better?
@@ConversationalPace would love to know this as well! It'd be a no go for me if it doesn't drain well
I forded rivers in the Swedish Arctic last week while out running 15miles/24km, super cold water, felt no problem with the shoes getting drenched at all, dried and felt comfortable really quick IMHO.
Love the shoes, my only regret is that I couldn't get my second pair in black, so I have 2 pairs of blue.
Love this shoe. Its also basically the nimbus 25 with a trail outsole. Best outsole compound on the market. Grips on wet surfaces better than anything else.
I really want a pair of these
I was so impressed with this outsole grip! I really hope this shoe helps nudge Asics into the direction of expanding their trail lineup even more.
@@ConversationalPace have you tried the Asics Gel Trabuco 12?
I have not, unfortunately. From what I've heard, the Trabuco 12 is firmer and is a little burlier feeling, closer to something like a Brooks Cascadia
@@ConversationalPace is the Trabuco 12 worth it under 60 $?
I ran a personal best time at my 3rd ever 50k. Legs felt great after it as well. I call it the Hoka Speedgoat killa.
Congrats on the PR and I agree, this shoe can definitely go toe to toe with the Speedgoat!
Just bought on RW for $99, looking forward to logging many miles here in South Carolina
That's one of the deals of the year! Good find!
Thanks for your reviews. All great so far (except that the Naked T/r does work incredibly well for some of us ;-) I would have considered this for the Cowboy 200, which I raced last November using the Hoka Tecton X (for the first 125 miles) until - after my feet had swollen a full size - I switched to the NNormal Tomir, which has a voluminous fit. Not sure if one shoe can work for 200 Miles if one’s feet swell so significantly. I might consider the ASICS for the Sangre de Cristo 200 in Colorado this September.
Thanks for watching! I agree, I'm not so sure there is really one shoe that could truly be great for the entirety of a 200 mile race, but this one could be close! It definitely would come down to foot swelling and if there is a need to go up a size mid-way through.
@@ConversationalPace the Naked T/r would be my first choice for Beyond 100 distances in the mountains if the upper were modified to allow boas or laces or some other kind of adjustability when swelling occurs. I would cache a second pair in a bigger size to deal with my enlarged feet. The midsole feel of the T/r is, as you pointed out in your video, the very best on the market today, including for those of us who don’t trust overbuilt shoes on technical climbs and especially descents. Cheers! And thanks again.
I just ordered these, I had the Novablast 3 TR for trail running and they were okay but these look more up my alley
Hope they work for you! These are definitely a little more trail ready, but perhaps even more cushion and very stable 👍
Did you notice the Velcro tab on back of shoe for gator attachment? Bought three pair of these and love them
Good eye! I seldom use gaiters in my running, so I don't think I even noticed while I was testing out these ones
Great review, guys. Would you also recommend this shoe for hiking and backpacking tours where you also cover a lot of kilometers?
Oh definitely! Comfort is key for something like that. Just make sure you are comfortable with only having the stability of a trail running shoe as opposed to a true hiking shoe
@@ConversationalPace Sounds good. I will try to walk around with my backpack in my apartment to make sure of that :). Or would you maybe for the sake of stability recommend the Gel Trabuco 12 over this one?
Tried it out at Art Sports in Yokohama (close to where I live). Really wanted to buy it but they only sold JP 28.0 and I need 28.5 (about US 10.5). Will probably still end up picking a pair up for a 100km race in May.
Yeah definitely don't want to force a half size short, especially for a 100k!
Interesting that you assume the “in-house” rubber is cheaper than say a Continental or Vibram and that is why the price is lower. Maybe their labor cost are lower over overseas?
the brands have to pay a fee to use the brand name rubber like continental or vibram. Like a franchising fee of sorts.
@@ConversationalPace great videos, but your statement still does not address the issue. Asics rubber could indeed be more expensive. Unless you have seen the material costs (and use fee), how do you know why the shoe is priced the way it is? It is only an assumption. No one has cost data to show that Vibram or Continental is in fact more expensive. And if it actually is, what is the actual material cost? $2 each shoe for a piece of molded rubber? The tooling costs are the same, the labor to install the rubber is essentially the same. You are only looking at the cost for the actual rubber compound.
@@edlorenz1552 There's a little more to it than just the price of the rubber compound. There's the price to get the vibram rubber to the asics factory for install as well. When a company like Asics is producing and selling many millions of pairs of shoes a year, they definitely have the means to mass produce their own outsole at a cheaper price than outsourcing Vibram. at the scale of a large company like Asics, it's cheaper to do it in house. For a smaller company like nnormal, for the amount they produce, it's going to be cheaper to go through a company like Vibram instead of purchasing all the machinery necessary to do it themselves. I've talked with a few large brands as well as Vibram, and I wish I was able to more publicly say specific pricing numbers, but those conversations were off the record. They don't make those pricing figures public
@@ConversationalPace I suggest just keep reviewing shoes, but don’t make blank statements about pricing that you don’t understand. You might know about shoes, but you definitely don’t know about manufacturing. Let’s just agree to disagree.
For technical downhill is this shoe performed very well? Thanks
i would say it's alright. With how high the stack is of this shoe, it is going to be less nimble and stable than many trail shoes that are lower to the ground. As far as max cushioned trail shoes go, I thought that this was one of the better ones on more technical terrain with the Hoka Mafate Speed 4 still being my favorite. Hope this helps!
Asics does a lot of TR versions of their top road shoes..... I think all of them.....most have 8mm offsets and low key knobs. The Novablast 3TR I founc to be more stable and way better fitting than Max 2. I am now checking out Cumulus 25 TR.. ----- broad midsole, roomy toe box, snug heel and midfoot, flexible forefoot and enough knobby for damp to dry trails....... and FF BLAST + for trail runners who like cushiion.. The max 2 midsole flairing (lack of) prevents higher paced off chamber running. Max 2 is a predictable surface trail shoe.
Yeah the width of the Max 2 doesn't lend it to be the most nimble of shoes for sure. I would be super curious to try out the Cumulus TR, as that has always been such a reliable shoe for me and I run on pretty mild trails so road cushioning with just a bit of tread is the sweet spot for most of my miles
Great review guys! I have a random question....what is the brand of cap you guys are wearing and where can I purchase one? Thanks
Thanks for watching! The hats are a coaching company called Trails & Tarmac. Here's a link to their shop trails-and-tarmac.myshopify.com/collections/trails-and-tarmac-gear
@@ConversationalPace Thank you for the link!
You mentioned the Caldera 6 - how would you compare the two in ride given their similar weights?
To me, the caldera was a touch firmer and a little lower to the ground, but even though the Asics was thicker, I still found it easier to cover all the paces in the Asics. I also thought the upper was more comfortable in the Asics. If I had to choose between the two for really anything actually, I'm going with the Asics
@@ConversationalPace Thanks - appreciate it.
@@ConversationalPace same sizing in tm2 as brooks?
Yeah they are definitely very similar for sizing
Do you recommend this as a general hiking sneaker?
generally speaking, it would be fantastic. If you know where in the world you would be spending the majority of your time hiking, there might be others that will be more specific to the terrain, but this Trabuco Max would be great across a wide variety for sure.
Super duper amazing 🤩🤩🤩
Agreed, such a fun shoe! Thanks for watching!
Would you recommend these for overpronators
I think it would depend on the severity of overpronation. This shoe does provide some stability, but it is still pretty soft, and there are shoes out there that could be even better for overpronation. Many trail shoes don't have any of the traditional features of road shoes that correct overpronation, because the trail underfoot is so different with each step and negates a lot of how those systems in a road shoe would work. So while this shoe would be alright, a few high stack shoes that might be better would be the Hoka Mafate and the Topo Ultraventure
I have a question. I really like this sneaker design, but the question is, would it be a good choice for hiking in the mountains for distances of 15 to 30 kilometers? If not, what would be the best choice in terms of comfort?
I think the answer for what shoe or shoes might work best would depend on the type of mountain trails you are hiking on. These are definitely some of the most comfortable shoes I have worn. I wouldn't take them on very technical terrain though, as the amount of cushion these shoes have does sacrifice some of the stability.
Could you compare them with the Max 1? They said that the first ones had a stability problem, have they improved it?
Unfortunately, I haven't run in the first generation of the Trabuco Max, so I'm not sure how the stability compares. For what it's worth, I did feel that for a shoe with this much stack height, it did feel pretty stable.
Its similar tô Asics Glideride 3, in terms of feel underfoot? Rocker and foam seems similar..
I haven't tried the Glideride 3 personally, but it should feel pretty similar in terms of cushioning. The rocker of the Glideride 3 appears to start a little earlier under the foot, which will make the heel to toe transition (on flat ground) smoother. The Trabuco Max 2 rocker is a little shorter and starts later to get a bit more of the shoe touching the ground at any given point so there is more stability, which is beneficial for the trail. Hope this helps!
Are these .... ore cushioned than the New Balance Fresh Foam X Trail V3 ?
The New Balance are definitely softer. I would have to imagine that in the long term, the Asics is going to deliver a higher quality cushion experience for more miles, because it starts out just a touch firmer.
I do have a question regarding this shoe, I'm a fairly heavy set guy around 15 Kilos overweight, although I have done a fair deal of weightlifting in the past so that ideal weight calculation might be off a few kilos. I've started taking up running as I need to get in shape but always had issues with knees and shins even before I got overweight. My physical therapist has guided me to Asics Gel shoes something I've had mentioned before but never really took note of. I've invested in Trabuco 11 GTX as well as some inlay soles to help stabilize my arches and have better form. So would the max 2 that is even more cushioned be a better shoe for me to alleviate fatigue and help me gain longer distance? I run a mixture of dirt. gravel and tarmac.
Sorry for the long rant hope you guys can give me some insight.
This is definitely a very debated topic and while I'm not a medical professional and this is not direct advice, this is what I've found to be helpful for me and runners I've worked with. A higher cushioned shoe will only help protect your knees/shins/joints etc if you are working on running with efficient biomechanics. If you have bad running form habits, then a higher cushioned shoe will likely only serve as a crutch that you will continue to lean into more, and you can only pack so much cushion in a shoe. If you are actively working on making your running form more efficient, which helps a lot with proper loading and unloading of the joints, then a higher cushioned shoe will also help you out. With all that being said, the Trabuco Max 2 has quite a bit more stack height (and softer foam) than the Trabuco 11. Thanks for watching!
@@ConversationalPace Thanls for the explanation, much appreciated 😊
Would love your opinion: I've got a first ever 50k coming up in April. Had a tough time finding shoes that fit my foot but The Trabuco Max 2 and Challenger 7 both fit. Which would you use on a SW (Sedona) 50k where you're not worried about finish time?
honestly, it's really a toss up if both are comfortable and fit well. I'd lean towards the challenger if there were more dirt (or even paved) road sections, and Asics if it has more singletrack. Asics might handle mud and slop a little better, but it's a pretty close match up. My gut is to always go with the one I am most comfortable in. Best of luck!
@@ConversationalPace Thank you! I'll train in both and see where the wind takes me. Appreciate it.
How does this compare to the Catamount 2 or Topo MTN Racer 2?
We haven't gotten to put the Catamount 2 on yet, unfortunately, but the Mtn Racer 2 is similar in regards to forefoot volume and space. The Topo toe box is a little more squared off, but the underfoot width of the Asics is actually a bit wider. Heel width is similar as well, but the biggest difference in overall fit is the way the arch shape feel. More arch shape in the Topo with some love or hate. The Asics took a little less risk there by keeping that overall arch height a little bit lower. Hope this helps!
@@ConversationalPace It does! People seem to love both the Catamount 2 and the MTN Racer 2 (ETA July for the 3?) so I'd like to compare them for trails. Need some cushion for my achey feet.
Same sizing as Nova b last 2? Pegasus 39?
Yes very similar sizing to those from a length standpoint. The toe box of the Trabuco Max 2 is a little bit rounder, so the toes will have more room to splay out, but that shouldn't be enough to affect the size you get. Hope this helps!
So is the Trabuco Max just for Ultra runners?!
Definitely not! I would at a minimum, say this shoe is for anyone looking for a maximally cushioned ride when out on the trails
No trail runners use Asics? what is Xavier Thevenard then? Also Should have bought these when I asked Brett About these awhile back Stoked to try these
Seemed like Xavier was the only one for a handful of years, but he has actually switched to On running. He's gonna be wishing he could wear these now!
@@ConversationalPace I read a poll that accounted shoes worn at UTMB all week and asics was top 5. (this was a few years ago) Hoka wasnt in the top 5, so it was an old report. But stoked to check these out
5 years is a long time in the trail world. Perhaps more popular outside of the US, but I would love to see Asics make more of a push into the US trail market
@@ConversationalPace Pro-trail runner Sara Alonso recently switched from Salomon to Asics
That's right! I hope that means there will be continued investment into the trail world by Asics. I don't see Sara running in this Trabuco Max 2 much, but hopefully there will be some fun lighter weight, more agile shoes down the line!
Is this a trail Superblast?
The superblast has FF Turbo foam whereas this Trabuco has FF Blast +, so the Trabuco is going to have a little less responsiveness than the Superblast. Combared to the rest of the Asics trail line up, this Trabuco definitely has the most in common with the Superblast
Thanks forcthe quick response and info. Have a good one@ConversationalPace
is this a shoe for heavy people ? im 137 kg
Yes, this could be a great shoe! It has plenty of cushion to protect the body, but also a wide base to help with stability. With these higher cushioned shoes that are very soft, it is important to replace them at the appropriate time when the cushion starts to break down. For higher stack shoes such as this one, there is more cushion to break down, which also increases the chance for it to break down unevenly, which can throw the ankles, knees, and hips out of alignment. Hope this helps!
Good point on Olympic trials but any other trail/cross country race the world athletics would not care. They are only concerned with road/pavement races.
now I have a dilemma. hoka stinson, or asics trabuco max 2
That's a tough one! The Stinson is going to provide even more cushioning and has a wider platform for stability. The Trabuco Max is going to feel a little bouncier, little lighter, and provide a bit better grip.
This shoe at USD85.... Should I buy it? 😅
Practically making money at that point! 😂
@@ConversationalPace Pulled the trigger today (5 months later after my comment here) at bought it at USD75 😂. Looked at the upcoming version 3, just an upper update with the exact same midsole and outsole.
Haha better late than never! Especially since you got the deal of the year!
more cushin for the pushin
🤣🤣
Serious chonk!
One of the chonkiest!
@ConversationalPace I like this shoe but I've been more into distance road running, down here we don't have snow on roads etc. I could easily buy the meta edge or sky. Have enough shoes right now though.
For trail very cushioned shoes it's not good choice, just my opinion. You need to have filing of control.
I think that's a fair statement. Out of some higher cushioned shoes, what have worked well for you?
Lets say Saucony Peregrine 13 , is much cheaper, it has very good grip, enough cushioned, plates, all together much clever buying.
Thanks a lot guys 🫡
Thanks for watching!